User talk:24.190.6.251
Sittin' Muscle - "It's Not English Homework" You know, your removal of at least one-third of the article because "it's not English homework" was one of the most uptight, persnickety, and snobbish things I've seen in years. As a writer, I take pride in writing long and detailed synopsis for even the simplest of television media. Have some respect! It took one hour and forty-four minutes to write that thing! I analyzed every detail, saw every scene, watched the whole episode to provide the synopsis for the article. I wrote it to be too detailed, considering some people actually respect detailed writing. As an administrator, I would have banned you if you were not such an otherwise good editor. Please sir, have some respect! Unlike you, I treat all works of writing as if it was to be graded. Writing is very enjoyable to me and remember: Wikia is designed to be improved upon, not for removing content! The wiki format allows users to build upon the works of others, thus constructively improving an article over time. Removing content does not improve an article. Was Here!]] Jesus Loves You and Died for You!! :) Speak to the Webmaster! I command you! 00:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC) Re: it's not English Homework. I apologize for my actions. It really wasn't my place since I'm just a random guest and you are an administrator. And I apologize again for my explanation, since it was unnecessarily brash and it audaciously assumed that you were a grade-schooler attempting to impress deaf ears with articulation. I understand that I was mistaken and that if I was "right", it would make me a bully. I must say that such a painstaking analysis and absorption of details is beyond admirable and I am glad that there are people who care enough about any show to do what you did. However, I must point out that such behavior is what one may call "persnickety" or "uptight", not my own. Now if I may formally explain my gaffe, since I was working with a word limit before, it seemed to me as though the amount of figurativeness you included was unnecessarily distracting from the plot and that you invested too much attention in non-sequiturs. My intent was to sacrifice the page's quantity in order to optimize its quality, so a reader could obtain the facts without having to skim around 1/3 of the article (your number, not mine). But I know now that it was merely my own opinion and that it clashed with the intentional way in which you manage your Wiki. While I made an erroneous assessment of your character, Please know I am by no means someone who cares not for the art of writing. I am merely an anonymous, efficiency-loving editor whose better judgment faltered when he read a synopsis that seemed like a hedge badly in need of pruning. But, you needn't worry about my interference any longer, since you've given me sufficient incentive to not return here. Please consider it an act of contrition as well. -a Flapjack fan and Wiki visitor who is coincidentally not of your religious faith.